Re: post_mountroot

Previous message: Stephen Smalley: "Re: [Linux-security-module-commit] lsm 2.5 tree change 1.2.1.19 1.2.1.20 1.2.1.21 1.2.1.22 1.2.1.23 1.2.1.24 1.2.1.25 1.2.1.26 1.2.1.27 1.2.1.28 1.2.1.29 1.2.1.30 1.294 1.295 1.296 1.297 1.298 1.299 1"
In reply to: Chris Wright: "Re: [Linux-security-module-commit] lsm 2.5 tree change 1.2.1.19 1.2.1.20 1.2.1.21 1.2.1.22 1.2.1.23 1.2.1.24 1.2.1.25 1.2.1.26 1.2.1.27 1.2.1.28 1.2.1.29 1.2.1.30 1.294 1.295 1.296 1.297 1.298 1.299 1.300 1.2.1.31 1.301 1.302"
Next in thread: Serge E. Hallyn: "Re: post_mountroot"
Reply: Serge E. Hallyn: "Re: post_mountroot"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

sdsat_private

On Mon, 17 Dec 2001, Chris Wright wrote:

> also, mount_root() has moved from fs/super.c to init/do_mounts.c and now
> uses sys_mount() rather than handling it all in mount_root().  so i'm not
> sure how we can handle the sb_ops->post_mountroot() hook (currently it
> does not exist anywhere).

Suppose that we dropped the explicit super_block parameter to
post_mountroot, and called the hook in prepare_namespace after the
sys_chroot call.  The hook function should be able to determine the
super_block from current->fs->rootmnt->mnt_sb at that point.

--
Stephen D. Smalley, NAI Labs
ssmalleyat_private

_______________________________________________
linux-security-module mailing list
linux-security-moduleat_private
http://mail.wirex.com/mailman/listinfo/linux-security-module